[Mazrim]

I also suspect that there will be an at-grade intersection to allow access to the casino.

I would bet money on that never happening.

[lubicon]

Not sure if anyone noticed this but the current intersection is so big that when you turn north or south onto Stoney from Crowchild, it looks like you need to go through another intersection. This has caused problems because people who turn in those directions via a turn signal all of a sudden stop in the middle thinking they have a red light. I think they need to have cops out there to direct traffic during rush hours.

It can be very confusing. I've seen people turning left ofF Crowchild then coming to a dead stop because they are facing a red light. The first time I went through it was momentarily confusing as well. They do have a flashing green arrow mounted to the side of the road but it is not very clear as to what that means. But it is relatively short term, the traffic pattern will be changed again hopefully by this fall - so another couple of months at the latest hopefully.

[mersar]

It can be very confusing. I've seen people turning left ofF Crowchild then coming to a dead stop because they are facing a red light. The first time I went through it was momentarily confusing as well. They do have a flashing green arrow mounted to the side of the road but it is not very clear as to what that means. But it is relatively short term, the traffic pattern will be changed again hopefully by this fall - so another couple of months at the latest hopefully.

Another couple weeks at most before its changed I bet. They've finished paving the off ramps for the SB to EB ramp and it looked like they'd rebuilt the road bed for Stoney itself all the way to where the detour alignment of Crowchild was, and the detour road is mostly down to the level of where Stoney needs to be. This was as of Monday night when I was through there.

[Jack Doe]

So, curious what you guys think:

What's the best solution for completing the SW ring road without tearing out hundreds of lakeview homes?

Is there an alternate solution for this quadrant if the SW ring road is not built?

The best solution from a highway engineering standpoint would be an 80km/h freeway south of 66 Av and something like Elbow Dr with a median north of it. A recipe for a clusterf**k from day one. Besides having housing fronting onto a major road, you would have a very convienent cut-thru route on 66 Av and 24 St to Crowchild Tr.

There is always alternatives unfortunatedly none of them are very good. Upgrading 14 St to a freeway would take some pressure off the 37 St corridor for a while but would increase traffic on Glenmore Tr. As well, houses would have to be taken out in Eagle Ridge and Braeside. There is a well-organized group of wealthy people who have been very successful at opposing any expansion of 14 St.

The only real alternatives for building a SWRR are thru the Tsuu Tina lands or expropriation of houses in Lakeview and Glamorgan.

[Jack Doe]

... We don't want to be like Saskatoon, where "Circle" Drive has been a 3/4 Circle Drive until this year when they've started the final portion ...

Saskatoon (population 250,000) will have a completed ring road (albeit not a true freeway...yet) in a couple of years. They have already demarked the route for the second ring which they intend to start building before the population hits 350k.

Calgary (population 1,100,000) will have a completed ring road in ? No concrete plans have been made for a second ring.

I think I like Saskatoons' approach to ring road planning better than Calgarys.:)

[Jack Doe]

There really isn't a good economical solution without knocking out 700-800 homes, or going through the reserve. Best to wait and try again later. The government should indicate that beyond particulars on what exact land the reserve would come to own (and whether it would then become reserve land is up to the feds and could be controversial) the deal as offered stands.

That way each successive band elections a pro road and anti road side will fight it out, and eventually one will get power with enough support to bring in the deal.

If you want to avoid both, you could always tunnel, but it would be exceedingly expensive, likely an order of magnitude higher.

There seem to be some misconceptions regarding the deal between the Tsuu Tina and Province. Perhaps I can clear up some of these.

The exact land the Tsuu Tina was to receive is set out in the agreement between the band and the province. It is 4,858.1 acres of Crown land and 320 acres of private land located NW of Bragg Creek, E of the Forest Reserve. The majority (95%) of the Crown land is leased to the Copithorne family.

If the province was unable to acquire the leases, the band was to be compensated. I have seen reports in the media that this was to be about $200m in addition to the $275m they would receive for the 988.21 acres they were required to relinquish for the transportation and utility corridor.

The chief of Tsuu Tina stated that he thought the reason of the majority of the people who voted against the agreement was that there was no guarantee the nation would actually receive the land. I can understand their reasoning. In every agreement the Tsuu Tina have made with another level of government they've received the short end of the stick. That's a polite way of saying they got screwed. They gave up the West Weaselhead for what amounted to a handful of beads (they are currently contemplating going to court to try get it back - I don't think they'll be successful) and their experience with the Sarcee Military Reserve left them with land strewn with unexploded ordinance and asbestos-filled housing.

The Copithorne family that owns the leases to the Crown land that was to become part of the reserve is a wealthy and politically-connected ranching family that owns large tracts of land west of Calgary. Clarence Copithorne was a minister in Peter Lougheeds' government and is sometimes credited as being the driving force behind the establishment of Kananaskis Country and Kananaskis Provincial Park (I refuse to call it Peter Lougheed PP - no cult of personality for me; I long for the day when Lougheedgrad is once again Kananaskisburg).

AFAIK no one has asked the Copithornes if they would even be willing to sell their leases. Perhaps if the provincial government secured an agreement to buy the leases, thus guaranting the band that they would receive the land, a vote on the agreement might turn out differently.

Part of the agreement was that if the provincial government secured the land it would then be turned over to the federal government. Not specifically the federal government, but to the feds to hold in trust for its real owner, Queen Elizabeth II. Many people are unaware that ownership of Indian Reserves is not actually with the natives but with our monarch.

The band council voted 8-1 in favour of the agreement. I suspect when band elections come around many are going to lose their jobs. Elections on the reserve depend a great deal on family ties. The Whitneys were overthrown by the Big Plumes and I suspect the Big Plumes are going to have a tough time of it come next election.

---

For any who care to view it, here is the final agreement between the province and the Tsuu Tina:

http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/2480.htm

Click on Tsuu T'ina Final Agreement (pdf 8 MB)

[Jack Doe]

I was chatting with a central Alberta MLA...

Unless he is a cabinet minister I wouldn't give much credence to what he had to say. Even if he was a cabinet minister, unless he's one of Eds' confidants, I have my doubts.

Transportation is one of any governments' biggest patronage schemes. Conservative, Liberal, NDP or BQ, they're pretty much all the same. Vote for the government and you get your road paved. Even by the provincial governments own measures our roads are deteriorating. Yet they keep expanding them in some regions (Calgary and Edmonton Ring Roads, Twinning Hwy 63 to Fort McMurray). One would think that the proper thing to do would be maintain what you have before you increase your commitment.

The trained seals (both government and opposition) who "represent" Calgary, in regards to the SouthWest Ring Road, are noted for their complete lack of interest. Better to keep your head down then actually make a commitment.

I agree with you that the government will take the most politically expiedent route to resolve this problem. More the pity.

[Jack Doe]

I would bet money on that never happening.

I'll take that bet.

Whenever the provincial government restricts access to a provincial highway they are required, if not by law than by custom, to provide alternative access. This usually requires the construction of service roads to the next "reasonable" access.

As I see it there are three possible access points to the SWRR north of the Elbow River for the Tsuu Tina:

1 - 66 Av/37 St
2 - Sarcee Tr/Glenmore (Stoney) Tr
3 - Westhills Dr/Glenmore (Stoney) Tr

1 - "If" 37 St is constructed to a freeway standard south of Glenmore Tr, then I believe the 37 St/66 Av interchange would be a north-in/out interchange. There would be no connection for traffic travelling to, or from, the south. This would be to prevent traffic short-cutting to Crowchild Tr.
A simple one-lane overpass from south-to-east would suffice. Give access to the Tsuu Tina and you would have to increase this to a three-lane (one eastbound, one westbound, and one east-to-north lane) bridge.

2 - Sarcee/Glenmore (Stoney) Tr would remain as a system-to-system interchange (no traffic lights), but would be greatly simplified as it would become a three-point interchange instead of the massive multi-point interchange that was initially envisioned. Adding a connection to the Tsuu Tina would greatly complicate this interchange and add to its cost.

3 - Westhills Dr/Glenmore (Stoney) Tr - This is the logical place to provide access to the Tsuu Tina. It is only a couple of hundred metres west of Sarcee/Glenmore (Stoney) and requires no expansion of the proposed overpass.

Saying something can "never" happen is a fools bet as you can "never" be proven right. I mean no offence, but I look forward to you buying me a beer.:)

The Tsuu Tina have said they will go to court if access is denied to them and I think they have a good case. They are, after all, Canadian and Albertan citizens, and are entitled to all rights and considerations as the rest of us. It depends on what a judge considers "reasonable". Any bets?

[Mazrim]

Saskatoon (population 250,000) will have a completed ring road (albeit not a true freeway...yet) in a couple of years. They have already demarked the route for the second ring which they intend to start building before the population hits 350k.

Calgary (population 1,100,000) will have a completed ring road in ? No concrete plans have been made for a second ring.

I think I like Saskatoons' approach to ring road planning better than Calgarys.:)

Ah, but you're looking at things a little differently. Saskatoon's road network pales in comparison just in the ratio of local/collector/expressway/freeway roads compared to Calgary. Circle Drive and Idlewyld (sp) are the only decent East/West roads in the City, the rest are clogged with traffic lights and tons of access points. Circle Drive is as much a part of the City as Glenmore is to Calgary, not necessarily a high-speed bypass that we look at Stoney Trail as.

It's great that Saskatoon and Regina have ring roads so to speak, but their use is definitely more of a local perspective than Stoney Trail's. Yes, locals use Stoney Trail, but the road is certainly more designed as a bypass.

As for the Casino access, none of your options propose an at-grade intersection with Stoney Trail, so I'm still in the green. :)

[MonctonGoldenFlames]

Whenever the provincial government restricts access to a provincial highway they are required, if not by law than by custom, to provide alternative access. This usually requires the construction of service roads to the next "reasonable" access.

i can't remember where i heard it, probably on this site, but i thought the city is only required to maintain a primary access point to the reserve, which would be the bull head road location.

[YYCguys]

^^^I do believe that is correct.

[freeweed]

Saskatoon (population 250,000) will have a completed ring road (albeit not a true freeway...yet) in a couple of years. They have already demarked the route for the second ring which they intend to start building before the population hits 350k.

Calgary (population 1,100,000) will have a completed ring road in ? No concrete plans have been made for a second ring.

I think I like Saskatoons' approach to ring road planning better than Calgarys.:)

I just drove through Saskatchewan (Regina) for the first time in about 5 years and I'm thoroughly impressed with their road system. Tons of money in that province these days compared to 10-15 years ago. However, as good as they build rings roads, and Regina's is amazing for a city of its size... Victoria Ave is a freaking disgrace. I counted no fewer than 5 sets of traffic lights in a row. So it's a bit hit and miss.

Calgary seems to be taking the "baby steps" approach. At least we don't have any NEW traffic lights going up in places which used to be freeflow (that I can think of, anyway).

[lubicon]

I just drove through Saskatchewan (Regina) for the first time in about 5 years and I'm thoroughly impressed with their road system. Tons of money in that province these days compared to 10-15 years ago. However, as good as they build rings roads, and Regina's is amazing for a city of its size... Victoria Ave is a freaking disgrace. I counted no fewer than 5 sets of traffic lights in a row. So it's a bit hit and miss.

Calgary seems to be taking the "baby steps" approach. At least we don't have any NEW traffic lights going up in places which used to be freeflow (that I can think of, anyway).

Not 100% sure, but IIRC there never used to be lights at Crowchild / 12 Mile Coulee Road but I may be mistaken. For sure there never were any at Crowchild / Bearspaw Road and now there. But that is not in City Limits.

[MMMBeer]

Victoria Ave is a freaking disgrace. I counted no fewer than 5 sets of traffic lights in a row. So it's a bit hit and miss.


Victoria Ave itself is not the problem, it's the fact that the Trans Canada runs on Victoria Ave that's the problem. You can say the same for many spots where the Trans Canada has urban traffic lights on it (e.g. Medicine Hat, Strathmore).

That's why Stoney is important as a bypass considering the gazillion lights on 16 Ave. I was amazed that the Trans Canada ran on 16 Ave when I first moved to Calgary.

[Seadood]

Ah, but you're looking at things a little differently. Saskatoon's road network pales in comparison just in the ratio of local/collector/expressway/freeway roads compared to Calgary. Circle Drive and Idlewyld (sp) are the only decent East/West roads in the City, the rest are clogged with traffic lights and tons of access points. Circle Drive is as much a part of the City as Glenmore is to Calgary, not necessarily a high-speed bypass that we look at Stoney Trail as.

It's great that Saskatoon and Regina have ring roads so to speak, but their use is definitely more of a local perspective than Stoney Trail's. Yes, locals use Stoney Trail, but the road is certainly more designed as a bypass.

Agreed to a point. I think there is a case for overbuilding and one for underbuilding. Saskatoon and Regina might be considered the latter, but there are a lot of wild cards (oops, "variables") to be considered. Population growth has (until recently) always lagged in the prairie cities, not including Alberta cities. That is a prime driver there. And take a look at the way the provinces behaved from say, the fifties onward. There has been a constant loosening of trade barriers over the years. Regina and to a lesser extent Saskatoon were very much nodal points for commerce, that is, any nationally known retailer covered his/her bases by placing a distribution centre in the province it served. Simpsons Sears and Canada Packers were big in the past. With the loosening of the trade barriers between provinces, it became more economical to provide regional nodes. Calgary and Edmonton got the lions share of those. That left the local drivers such as population growth and whatever new industry (mostly agribusiness) driving the demand for increased transportation. But if you parse it down even further, the origins of the Ring Road (I use Regina as an example as I am most familiar with it) were to get the traffic out of the DT core. Victoria and Albert must have gotten quite congested. The southern half of the Ring Road was there in the sixties (yes, I remember it), nearest housing was 1/2 mile away. Albeit was a 2 lane, but it was still a "bypass". The development of the north 1/2 then grew more to service the industrial expansion and to relieve traffic from west-north in addition to north-south.

[Seadood]

II: It is interesting to note that the ring road was easily upgraded to a free flow by the eighties without having to bulldoze anything. The problem though, now, is Victoria east of the ring road. Commercialization and suburbanization leapt into the breach before a dithering city/regional plan was in place, hence the congestion. A second ring is in the works now to bypass all of that. Will it be built? Who knows.....

A case for overbuilding might be Winnipeg ring road. Have never driven the south side but in the north(west) they built it so far out that you are driving out in the country. I think in this scenario, planning was a little too optimistic. Perhaps the reason is the density of the city proper would render it impossible politically to bulldoze houses within the corporate limits.

Most of this is merely throwing out some observations and attempting to draw conclusions from it. We (lay people) know far more about planning now than ever before because of the internet. The province communicates its planning in far greater detail, and virtuously instantly.

[Seadood]

That's why Stoney is important as a bypass considering the gazillion lights on 16 Ave. I was amazed that the Trans Canada ran on 16 Ave when I first moved to Calgary.

The TCH is definitely served by the NENWRR, but it isn't the primary beneficiary of it. Trade flows are by far greater north-south than east-west. But the TCH definitely benefits from it. The TCH is where it is due to an incredibly strong business lobby. Remember a few years ago, a couplet system was proposed? Shot down pretty quick.
And the lights? My opinion is more of a traffic calmning/tranquilizing effect than access issue. Cars=bad, mothers pushing babystrollers=good.

[freeweed]

That's why Stoney is important as a bypass considering the gazillion lights on 16 Ave. I was amazed that the Trans Canada ran on 16 Ave when I first moved to Calgary.

Absolutely. It was one of the single biggest annoyances about Calgary (until just recently of course).

[freeweed]

A case for overbuilding might be Winnipeg ring road. Have never driven the south side but in the north(west) they built it so far out that you are driving out in the country. I think in this scenario, planning was a little too optimistic. Perhaps the reason is the density of the city proper would render it impossible politically to bulldoze houses within the corporate limits.

Winnipeg's ring road (the Perimeter Highway as it's called) is a case of planning for the past, and not being able to predict the future. When it was conceived and designed, the city was still growing at a pretty good pace and was expected to have long since filled in the area surrounded by the Perimeter. Unfortunately Winnipeg's growth slowed considerably and then took a serious nosedive starting in the 80s or so, and by the 90s had completely stalled. But when it was designed and built? It was anticipated that development would reach the road within a couple of decades at most.

In the south it used to be the same, where it was several km outside the built up city area in some places. It's been filling in over the past few decades though, to the point that houses are now visible from much of it. The funny part (and much to the chagrin of locals) is all the lights still on it. It's not exactly freeflow but again, when built it was assumed the city would keep growing and overpasses would be built as necessary. When the city stopped growing (and we stopped building roads like it was 1960) the lights remained. As the city has continued to grow, and truck traffic has vastly increased over rail, those lights have become a serious annoyance.

Speaking of rail, there's still a level crossing on the south side, if you can believe it. Things don't seem too bad now but that used to be one of the busier lines in Winnipeg. Traffic would be stopped several times every day for a long long time as trains slowly lumbered into the yards.

[Seadood]

Speaking of rail, there's still a level crossing on the south side, if you can believe it. Things don't seem too bad now but that used to be one of the busier lines in Winnipeg. Traffic would be stopped several times every day for a long long time as trains slowly lumbered into the yards.

What is the status of #75? Does the prov govt provide the necessary funds to upgrade it to handle NAFTA? If not, seems to be the weak link in the network.

Yeah, I thought at-grade r/r crossings were verboten these days. On #4 south of Lethbridge at Milk River is a LEVEL CROSSING, on a NAFTA highway!
The highway bypasses to the west of town, but utilizes a level crossing for a spur line into Milk River. Probably a temporary situation until the grain companies build an inland terminal off the main line and get the current facility out of town.

[Innersoul1]

So here is my question:

|The new overpass at 37th and Glenmore sure went up in a hurry. They used concrete beams (girders) to span Glenmore and placed concrete slabs laterally on those to create the bridge deck. What is the lifespan on a bridge like that? Any reason why this type of construction isn't used in other city applications?

[Oliver Klozov]

The Stage 4 (late August) and Stage 5 (late October) site plans for Stoney/Crowchild are now available on the AB Transp website.

http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/Content/docType490/production/stcrow-ms4.pdf

http://www.transportation.alberta.ca/Content/docType490/production/stcrow-ms5.pdf

Well, they missed on the Stage 4 date - it shows the SB-EB left turn closed and the SB-EB ramp and bridge over Crowchild open.

Stage 5 is interesting. They show Stoney going under Crowchild but both southbound and northbound lanes are on the southbound side. This is probably to better accommodate the EB-NB ramp and tie-in construction. EB Crowchild will become free-flow with lights on WB only for EB-NB left turns onto the temporary ramp.

Stoney will likely remain 60 kph through the area but it is going to be a heck of a lot better to get through there.

[kap384]

[QUOTE=Oliver Klozov;4974465]

Stage 5 is interesting. They show Stoney going under Crowchild but both southbound and northbound lanes are on the southbound side. This is probably to better accommodate the EB-NB ramp and tie-in construction. EB Crowchild will become free-flow with lights on WB only for EB-NB left turns onto the temporary ramp.

QUOTE]



Makes sense based on the crossover lanes they've already paved. I was wondering how exactly they'd be used.

[Mazrim]

So here is my question:

|The new overpass at 37th and Glenmore sure went up in a hurry. They used concrete beams (girders) to span Glenmore and placed concrete slabs laterally on those to create the bridge deck. What is the lifespan on a bridge like that? Any reason why this type of construction isn't used in other city applications?

I'm not terribly familiar with the structural side of things, but my thought would be that a single continous pour of a deck has better strength and a better lifespan than the more temporary one we're seeing here.

For the right price, anything can be built quickly though. Just look at the I-35W bridge!

[tmjr]

CALGARY -- The final southwest stretch of the ring road planned to eventually encircle the city will not be approved if government proposals are unacceptable to the community, according to a local MLA.

On Saturday, Calgary-Elbow MLA Alison Redford addressed a group of about 300 local residents opposed to constructing the stretch of highway.

On behalf of the minister of transportation, Redford said: "This is not intended to hurt this community . . . . If the community doesn't agree with where we go, then we don't do it."

After the meeting, a spokesperson for Redford said the intent was to assure residents they would be consulted during the process and that unacceptable proposals would not go forward.

A spokesperson for Transportation Minister Luke Ouellette confirmed the government would not push a proposal that was denounced by the community.


Community given veto in ring road plan (http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/calgary/Community+given+veto+ring+road+plan/3512746/story.html)

[Innersoul1]

Community given veto in ring road plan (http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/calgary/Community+given+veto+ring+road+plan/3512746/story.html)

FACEPALM! :shrug:

[MalcolmTucker]

This is a good thing however:

Redford said the province is still willing to negotiate with residents on the nearby reserve if they come forward with a proposal.

Read more: Herald (http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/calgary/Community+given+veto+ring+road+plan/3512746/story.html#ixzz0zQrolJ8R)

[Mazrim]

Good to see that 300 residents will block pretty much any proposal then. They might approve a 2 lane 50km/h road, though! :(

[DizzyEdge]

Good to see that 300 residents will block pretty much any proposal then. They might approve a 2 lane 50km/h road, though! :(

With traffic calming humps.

[YYCguys]

The Herald article mentions that there's 40 m between the Lakeview houses and the Tsuu Tina land border. What level of ring road could be built in that space without disturbing any of the houses (ie: number of lanes, maximum speed, curbs/shoulders, interchanges, stacked or surface, etc)?

[MalcolmTucker]

^ Well, considering a number of houses front on the road already there, any impact would be atrocious for building above ground. With the structure that would be needed I would think people would rather get a buy out!

To be functional while leaving all the current houses I would imagine a stacked elevated road would be needed. With giving communities veto over the process (the PCs can't afford to drop a single seat during the next election) I don't think anything will be built until there is a new government, a deal, or so much pressure a tunnel is built.

[Mazrim]

Talking an absolute minimum cross section here (Shoulders, 4 lanes, median barrier), you're looking at 24.8m before ramps, interchanges and so on.
2.5 + 3.7 + 3.7 + 2 + 1 + 2 + 3.7 + 3.7 + 2.5 is what I'm thinking. Then you need to add in about 4-6m on either side for clearance, pushing us to 36.8m. If you want to see this cross section in action at 100km/h, go to Kicking Horse Canyon through the newly built section. It's pretty tight and people are understandably not racing through it.

[Seadood]

Harvest Hills interchange looks to be nearing completion. How do the approaches look? It was dark when I drove it, but I could see the ramps were paved and painted.

[mersar]

Last time I was through there it looked like it was mostly bridge deck work remaining, the ramps looked pretty much ready. Similar over at Crowchild for the SB to EB ramp, the bridge looked like its the main thing left on that particular ramp, all the approaches have been paved and painted and its just a matter of that bridge being ready for them to open stage 4.

[Seadood]

Last time I was through there it looked like it was mostly bridge deck work remaining, the ramps looked pretty much ready. Similar over at Crowchild for the SB to EB ramp, the bridge looked like its the main thing left on that particular ramp, all the approaches have been paved and painted and its just a matter of that bridge being ready for them to open stage 4.

Exactly how long has Crow/Stoney been torn up? 5 years?

[lubicon]

Exactly how long has Crow/Stoney been torn up? 5 years?

That's about right. I believe construction started in 2005. That's just ot that particualr intersection though. Stoney has been under construction in one form or another between Country Hills Blvd and Hwy #1 since I moved to Calgary in 1997.

[freeweed]

Stoney has been under construction in one form or another between Country Hills Blvd and Hwy #1 since I moved to Calgary in 1997.

And Crowchild - you once posted an interesting list/timeline that described 11-12 years of near-continuous construction on Crowchild. Thankfully we might be seeing the light at the end of the tunnel?

[Seadood]

And Crowchild - you once posted an interesting list/timeline that described 11-12 years of near-continuous construction on Crowchild. Thankfully we might be seeing the light at the end of the tunnel?

Don't count on it. The second Crow/Stoney is finished the LRT will be tying things up.

[Mazrim]

Don't count on it. The second Crow/Stoney is finished the LRT will be tying things up.

Maybe by time the LRT makes it's way past Stoney, the rumblings of a 12 Mile Coulee interchange will start... ;)

[bookermorgan]

Stoney - Harvest Hills/Centre IC
http://i375.photobucket.com/albums/oo196/dj_drakstar/BridgeSurvey.jpg

http://i375.photobucket.com/albums/oo196/dj_drakstar/BridgeSurvey2.jpg

http://i375.photobucket.com/albums/oo196/dj_drakstar/HarvestHillsBridge.jpg

[Mazrim]

Hold on a second, there's a road under the Crowchild bridge? When they decide to that? :rolleyes:

[mersar]

Isn't that the Harvest Hills bridge?

[Mazrim]

You're probably right...I couldnt quite tell.

[bookermorgan]

Yeah it is harvest/stoney a few months back. got the photos from surveyor

[tmjr]

Hello again,

On Naheed Nenshi's website, regarding the SWRR, he makes the following statement:
“Going through the Weaselhead and up the 37th Street alignment takes us back to 1950’s planning: tear down houses, build enormous bridges and endanger some of southern Alberta’s most vital environmental areas. And for what? Simply getting people out of congestion on 14th Street to congestion on Crowchild Trail?” Let's get South West Calgary moving! (http://www.nenshi.ca/new/2010/236)

I don't quite follow the "Simply getting people out of congestion on 14th St. to congestion on Crowchild Trail?" part. How are the two related?

I imagined that when/if the SWRR is built, it would be a quick route from the west side to the deep south - e.g. I will be able to take it from my house in Scenic Acres to the deep south completely avoiding both Crowchild and 14th St. Is this not the point?

Thanks!

[Koolfire]

Hello again,

On Naheed Nenshi's website, regarding the SWRR, he makes the following statement:
Let's get South West Calgary moving! (http://www.nenshi.ca/new/2010/236)

I don't quite follow the "Simply getting people out of congestion on 14th St. to congestion on Crowchild Trail?" part. How are the two related?

I imagined that when/if the SWRR is built, it would be a quick route from the west side to the deep south - e.g. I will be able to take it from my house in Scenic Acres to the deep south completely avoiding both Crowchild and 14th St. Is this not the point?

Thanks!


If you dig into it further he says 90% of the traffic from 14th Ave is headed to Downtown. Therefore instead of going on 14th to Crowchild via Glenmore they would go SWRR to Crowchild via Glenmore. Not sure if I agree with this logic as the South LRT line isn't that far from 14th Steet.

[tmjr]

Ah! Now I understand - SWRR to Glenmore to Crowchild...

THanks!

[Mazrim]

Considering how the Glenmore causeway is a bottleneck for pretty much ALL traffic travelling through the SW in some way, not just for downtown...I'm not sure I buy Nenshi's idea on how that works. Perhaps this is how people in the NE view the SW Ring Road... :(

[Seadood]

Nenshi's premise is that he is the only one who has thought anything out, simply because he is an academic. Everyone else is a troglodyte. He just used a few buzzwords ("1950s planning..."). I think it shows a tremendous amount of arrogance toward anyone else's planning skills. Sorry, all you Nenshi fans, I just don't like the guy.

[DizzyEdge]

I think if one thing might be worthy of having others think they have better ideas, it might be planning in this city over the past few decades.

[Bassic Lab]

Considering how the Glenmore causeway is a bottleneck for pretty much ALL traffic travelling through the SW in some way, not just for downtown...I'm not sure I buy Nenshi's idea on how that works. Perhaps this is how people in the NE view the SW Ring Road... :(

Actually, I would say that Glenmore is significantly less of a bottleneck for downtown bound traffic than the reverse. It is the large number of people taking Glenmore, from the north and west parts of the city, to get to SE employment centres and back that seem to cause the worst problems. Unlike downtown bound residents of the deep south, these commuters do not have a speedy and direct transit line to their jobs that makes a viable alternative to driving and any possible SW RR is a route that is both out of the way and largely useless for avoiding Glenmore congestion. Trying to get to Foothills Industrial via a SW RR, Anderson, and Deerfoot is, if any thing, a great deal lousier.

[Mathgod]

For those of you who are interested in hearing more about Nenshi's views on the SWRR, check out this podcast:

http://naheednenshi.buzzsprout.com/2383/16202-nenshi-for-mayor-podcast-5-get-south-west-calgary-moving

Makes sense to me... at the end of the day, why is a SWRR actually needed?

Fix 14th Street, and bolster transit service in the deep SW. Problem solved for a fraction of the cost.

(PS - I'm not a post-and-leave spammer; I look forward to contributing to this board.)

[Seadood]

Makes sense to me... at the end of the day, why is a SWRR actually needed?

Fix 14th Street, and bolster transit service in the deep SW. Problem solved for a fraction of the cost.

(PS - I'm not a post-and-leave spammer; I look forward to contributing to this board.)

First of all, we already had this go-round with the homeowners on 14th St. You haven't solved any problem - you've only moved it 23 blocks east.
Second - I call Bull on having to doze 700 houses.
Third - I am so glad Nenshi drives from the NE to the SW daily, but am troubled at why he feels his time is better spent in his car. His solution is to put more people in public transit - except himself. And BTW, his using the ring road daily logs more miles and therefore contributes to GHG. Typical of the academic elite - do as I say, not as I do. He could be grading papers on the bus/Ctrain.

[mersar]

They've moved all the construction equipment that had been sitting on the SB->EB ramp at Crowchild off and its looking pretty much ready to be opened when I went through there twice last night.

[Seadood]

You know, its really nice to solve problems by saying we need more transit. But what you are really doing is passing the issue off your desk and on to some bureaucrat's. This would then go to a transit planning committee and the numbers would be crunched. Then buses would be assigned, schedules changed and then....oops! There aren't enough people after 6PM to warrant the scheduling, therefore the service slows down. Not economical. It becomes the commuters' problem again. Commuters vote with their car keys, and voila - the problem is back in the forefront.

[MonctonGoldenFlames]

why is a SWRR actually needed?

to complete the 'ring'?

otherwise, we should just call it stoney trail horsehoe road. the road is required, regardless of how much some of the affluent southwest dwellers don't want a freeweay obstructing their mountain view.

[freeweed]

Third - I am so glad Nenshi drives from the NE to the SW daily, but am troubled at why he feels his time is better spent in his car. His solution is to put more people in public transit - except himself. And BTW, his using the ring road daily logs more miles and therefore contributes to GHG. Typical of the academic elite - do as I say, not as I do. He could be grading papers on the bus/Ctrain.

This is something that continually bugs me about politicians in this city. We constantly get told how great transit is, how we should be using it, how we should have civic policies that encourage it, etc, etc, etc.

Yet I know of no Alderman or Mayor who ever takes transit. They all have free parking at City Hall.

Put your money where your mouth is, boys. I think I'd vote for a mayoral candidate that takes transit daily on that fact alone, just to prove a point.

[Seadood]

One of the things I would like Nenshi to do is crunch the numbers for this fantastic upgrade of 14th St. He wants to improve (I assume that means grade separation) intersections at 90th, Southland, Anderson and Heritage.
So that's a MINIMUM of $240 million ($60 mm /interchange) then there would have to be expropriation around those intersections. Have no idea what that would cost. And it would still jam up at Crowchild. All of that on the City's dime, although the province would surely chip in.

[Radley77]

FYI: Barb Higgins stance on SWRR is to renew negotiations with Tsuu T'ina.

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showpost.php?p=4999510&postcount=1645

[Seadood]

What I can't understand, however, is the lack of movement on the province's part to complete the SWRR from 16th to Glenmore, with some interchange work at Sarcee. Could they not do that work, and a least get some of the network in place while they flail over what to do with 37th? Would traffic volumes increase that greatly to the point of failure on Glenmore? It would vastly improve the Highway 8 problems; those cars aren't going away anytime soon.

[Seadood]

FYI: Barb Higgins stance on SWRR was to renew negotiations with Tsuu T'ina.



Unfortunately I think that is the only solution. Big Plume was in favour of the old deal, but was defeated in the vote. There must be some allies in the council that want to see it go thru.

[fusili]

First of all, we already had this go-round with the homeowners on 14th St. You haven't solved any problem - you've only moved it 23 blocks east.
Second - I call Bull on having to doze 700 houses.
Third - I am so glad Nenshi drives from the NE to the SW daily, but am troubled at why he feels his time is better spent in his car. His solution is to put more people in public transit - except himself. And BTW, his using the ring road daily logs more miles and therefore contributes to GHG. Typical of the academic elite - do as I say, not as I do. He could be grading papers on the bus/Ctrain.

Ah, the ad hominem. How I love thee.

[Seadood]

Ah, the ad hominem. How I love thee.

Any reason why Nenshi should get a free pass?
I'm sure he has many, many good ideas, but that's all they are - ideas. I have lots of good ideas too. That doesn't mean I'm qualified to be mayor. This is why we question these jokers, its called vetting.
The thing I have a problem with, and that goes for all candidates, is the desire to land the big job, without doing the necessary steps to get there. Former aldermen have a leg-up on other candidates because they sat thru all of that drudge every Monday night. do you actually think Higgins is qualified to be mayor? How about Oscar Fech? Between the two of them, I'd say Fech is more qualified because he was around the council chambers every Monday night. Was Higgins?

[fusili]

Any reason why Nenshi should get a free pass?

If Ric McIver said recycling is a good thing for the city, and we should pursue organics recycling to capture methane for heating homes, and then threw an apple core into the garbage, that wouldn't make organic recycling a bad idea. It is the idea and the argument that is important, not the person saying it. I am all for debating the pros and cons of the SWRR and the alternative solutions, but who makes those arguments is irrelevant.

[Seadood]

I would still like the members here to vet my idea about at least starting to build the SWRR to Glenmore. My argument is it would start to relieve the bottlenecks that are beginning to show up on SB Crowchild.

[Mazrim]

What I can't understand, however, is the lack of movement on the province's part to complete the SWRR from 16th to Glenmore, with some interchange work at Sarcee. Could they not do that work, and a least get some of the network in place while they flail over what to do with 37th? Would traffic volumes increase that greatly to the point of failure on Glenmore? It would vastly improve the Highway 8 problems; those cars aren't going away anytime soon.
There's a couple reasons. The first is that they would like to put the entire SW as one big job, rather than split it into smaller pieces. P3 projects run best as bigger chunks than smaller pieces.

The second reason is because the Highway 8 design is still in progress. They need to figure out what is going on with the 4 laning of Highway 8 before they proceed with connecting Stoney Trail to it. The Glenmore interchange will change a ton depending on the final location of the ring road South of there.

[Seadood]

If Ric McIver said recycling is a good thing for the city, and we should pursue organics recycling to capture methane for heating homes, and then threw an apple core into the garbage, that wouldn't make organic recycling a bad idea. It is the idea and the argument that is important, not the person saying it. I am all for debating the pros and cons of the SWRR and the alternative solutions, but who makes those arguments is irrelevant.

Agreed. But for someone to come into the mayoral forum and say that all work done on this file needs to be thrown out insults all of the work and mindpower of the ones who preceded him/her. How does Nenshi know we don't need a RR? How much time has he actually spent on this file? How much neighbourhood consultation has he engaged in? In my mind, he hasn't spent very much at all - he was relying on stats from a somewhat hysterical community association leader (700 houses). And I'm supposed to vote for a candidate who has solved SW Calgary's traffic woes with a 9 minute podcast?

[Doug]

SSW Ring Road is a Provincial issue. Municipal politicians should stay out of the debate. I still think the agreement with the Tsuu T'Ina fell apart because too many municipal politicians had opinions.

[Seadood]

Grrrr! I hate politics!
Mazrim: Thank you for the heads up on SWRR/#8 issues.
And to Fusili - thank you for your views on the problems we face in SW Calgary.

[fusili]

Agreed. But for someone to come into the mayoral forum and say that all work done on this file needs to be thrown out insults all of the work and mindpower of the ones who preceded him/her. How does Nenshi know we don't need a RR? How much time has he actually spent on this file? How much neighbourhood consultation has he engaged in? In my mind, he hasn't spent very much at all - he was relying on stats from a somewhat hysterical community association leader (700 houses). And I'm supposed to vote for a candidate who has solved SW Calgary's traffic woes with a 9 minute podcast?

I think his question was valid. What is the use of the SWRR? It isn't diverting freight traffic that is traversing the city (which is already done by the North Ring Road). It isn't giving freight traffic in the SE industrial better access to major highways, which is what Glenmore is doing. So what is the purpose of the SWRR?

Essentially, the SWRR would be used to help residents of SW calgary (well, south of Glenmore and west of 14th) get to downtown easier and, to a lesser extent, get residents of west Calgary to the SE industrial area. There will be some northbound traffic going to MRU and the Richmond Road office park, but that is minimal. But, shouldn't we address the problem of downtown and SE industrial area traffic, instead of just assuming that the ring road is the best way to do it. Right tool for the job and all that.

Rather than ask "how can we build the ring road" ask "how can we solve the traffic issues of SW Calgary?" The answer may be the Ring Road, but other alternatives should not be precluded.

[Oliver Klozov]

.... What is the use of the SWRR? It isn't diverting freight traffic that is traversing the city (which is already done by the North Ring Road). ....

I disagree. As someone who travels between Canmore and Okotoks and other points south a lot, I can assure you there is substantial truck traffic on Hwy 22 through Bragg Creek and it is increasing. There is now so much truck traffic in addition to cars, that I've been using Glenmore/Deerfoot since the causeway work was completed because it is faster, even in rush hour!


And for those that think reopening negotiations with the Tsuu Tina is the way to go, I also disagree. They've already turned down an outrageously sweet deal. How much more are you willing to offer? 100 million? 500 million? 1 billion? 10 billion? Whatever number you come up with, it won't be enough. They will turn it down again because they will always think they can hold out for more. And then there's the time; renegotiations would be at least 10 more years, deal is struck, deal is voted down, 10 more years of renegotiations, deal is struck, deal is voted down, 10 more years of ........

[bigcanuck]

And for those that think reopening negotiations with the Tsuu Tina is the way to go, I also disagree. They've already turned down an outrageously sweet deal. How much more are you willing to offer? 100 million? 500 million? 1 billion? 10 billion? Whatever number you come up with, it won't be enough. They will turn it down again because they will always think they can hold out for more. And then there's the time; renegotiations would be at least 10 more years, deal is struck, deal is voted down, 10 more years of renegotiations, deal is struck, deal is voted down, 10 more years of ........

Whether it's the actual truth or not, the reason given as to why the last proposal was voted down was because the agreement was too vague on a number of "future related" issues - not the total compensation. If that is the truth, in theory, the next proposal could simply build on the "future related" issues that were apparently not included in the first agreement and the overall compensation wouldn't have to be changed much at all.

[craner]

FYI: Barb Higgins stance on SWRR is to renew negotiations with Tsuu T'ina.

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showpost.php?p=4999510&postcount=1645

:gaah:
I agree with Oliver Klozov's comments above, we'll never reach the end if we go this route.

[craner]

For those of you who are interested in hearing more about Nenshi's views on the SWRR, check out this podcast:

http://naheednenshi.buzzsprout.com/2383/16202-nenshi-for-mayor-podcast-5-get-south-west-calgary-moving

Makes sense to me... at the end of the day, why is a SWRR actually needed?

Fix 14th Street, and bolster transit service in the deep SW. Problem solved for a fraction of the cost.

(PS - I'm not a post-and-leave spammer; I look forward to contributing to this board.)

:brickwall:

[Mazrim]

SSW Ring Road is a Provincial issue. Municipal politicians should stay out of the debate. I still think the agreement with the Tsuu T'Ina fell apart because too many municipal politicians had opinions.

The City of Calgary and the Province have an agreement that they will work together on a final alignment for the Ring Road. The Province will lead studies and design, and the City will provide consultation and advice on their end of things, but the decision will not be held by one entity.

I think his question was valid. What is the use of the SWRR? It isn't diverting freight traffic that is traversing the city (which is already done by the North Ring Road). It isn't giving freight traffic in the SE industrial better access to major highways, which is what Glenmore is doing. So what is the purpose of the SWRR?

Essentially, the SWRR would be used to help residents of SW calgary (well, south of Glenmore and west of 14th) get to downtown easier and, to a lesser extent, get residents of west Calgary to the SE industrial area. There will be some northbound traffic going to MRU and the Richmond Road office park, but that is minimal. But, shouldn't we address the problem of downtown and SE industrial area traffic, instead of just assuming that the ring road is the best way to do it. Right tool for the job and all that.

Rather than ask "how can we build the ring road" ask "how can we solve the traffic issues of SW Calgary?" The answer may be the Ring Road, but other alternatives should not be precluded.

No offense Fusili, but I feel that you're only regurgitating Nenshi's POV on the SW Ring Road. I think you only need to look at the NW portion of Stoney Trail to see just how big a difference it can make to that quadrant of the City. The NW was already fortunate to have multiple routes that span the quadrant going East to West, but with the addition of Stoney Trail, the whole network has benefitted.

The SW is in a much worse position than the NW was before the opening of Stoney Trail. Thanks to Fish Creek Park, the Glenmore Reservoir, and the Native land/Weaselhead, all commuters in the SW are severely limited in route selection to head to major population areas in that quadrant.

I used to live in Signal Hill, and my commute was to the deep south every day. There is no alternate route when there is an accident on Glenmore Trail in the morning rush. I have to eat the 45 minute delay in my day. Transit falls behind. People are late to school at MRU. There is no E-W relief valve, so to speak. If there's an accident on John Laurie, take Crowchild or Country Hills.

I have never viewed the SW Ring Road as a road to get downtown. I rarely go downtown anyways, and when I do, I prefer to take the train.

Like I have said many times, Glenmore destination traffic studies are not predominately downtown based like Nenshi thinks. If that was the case, why is Glenmore so busy past Crowchild? Why does Sarcee back up so much? These people are not coming from downtown to head home in the NW. The deep South and SE Industrial Parks are major players in traffic generation, contrary to the downtown-only point of view some are taking.

I know my position on the ring road is blatantly obvious on this forum, but there is a good reason the busiest section of the ring road was always projected to be the SW. It's not truck traffic, either.

[Nudrock]

I would still like the members here to vet my idea about at least starting to build the SWRR to Glenmore. My argument is it would start to relieve the bottlenecks that are beginning to show up on SB Crowchild.

Yes it would be nice to get this bit done.
But there are probably many reasons preventing them from starting such as money flow issues
budget approvals / timelines / sticking to their approved plan etc
maybe they want to see how another P3 goes into service before starting another one.
The alignment of the extreme SW portion might affect the alignment of the TCH to Glenmore route.

Unfortunately, things are never as easy as calling up some joe to get-er-done.

[fusili]

No offense Fusili, but I feel that you're only regurgitating Nenshi's POV on the SW Ring Road. I think you only need to look at the NW portion of Stoney Trail to see just how big a difference it can make to that quadrant of the City. The NW was already fortunate to have multiple routes that span the quadrant going East to West, but with the addition of Stoney Trail, the whole network has benefitted.

The SW is in a much worse position than the NW was before the opening of Stoney Trail. Thanks to Fish Creek Park, the Glenmore Reservoir, and the Native land/Weaselhead, all commuters in the SW are severely limited in route selection to head to major population areas in that quadrant.

I used to live in Signal Hill, and my commute was to the deep south every day. There is no alternate route when there is an accident on Glenmore Trail in the morning rush. I have to eat the 45 minute delay in my day. Transit falls behind. People are late to school at MRU. There is no E-W relief valve, so to speak. If there's an accident on John Laurie, take Crowchild or Country Hills.

I have never viewed the SW Ring Road as a road to get downtown. I rarely go downtown anyways, and when I do, I prefer to take the train.

Like I have said many times, Glenmore destination traffic studies are not predominately downtown based like Nenshi thinks. If that was the case, why is Glenmore so busy past Crowchild? Why does Sarcee back up so much? These people are not coming from downtown to head home in the NW. The deep South and SE Industrial Parks are major players in traffic generation, contrary to the downtown-only point of view some are taking.

I know my position on the ring road is blatantly obvious on this forum, but there is a good reason the busiest section of the ring road was always projected to be the SW. It's not truck traffic, either.

No offense taken. Thanks for the explanation.

Ring road issues aside, I really think Calgary has to seriously look at improving transit to the SE industrial. It is harder to service, because job density is not as high as the downtown, but I believe creative solutions can be found, such as having a few major transit hubs located in the district, and a sort of para-transit service to serve as feeders for the major transit hub. A combination of LRT/BRT can serve to get people from around the city there quickly and the para-transit system can circulate them once there.

[Mathgod]

First of all, we already had this go-round with the homeowners on 14th St. You haven't solved any problem - you've only moved it 23 blocks east.
Second - I call Bull on having to doze 700 houses.
Third - I am so glad Nenshi drives from the NE to the SW daily, but am troubled at why he feels his time is better spent in his car. His solution is to put more people in public transit - except himself. And BTW, his using the ring road daily logs more miles and therefore contributes to GHG. Typical of the academic elite - do as I say, not as I do. He could be grading papers on the bus/Ctrain.
http://www.nenshi.ca/new/2010/141

He acknowledges that transit is currently viewed by many as inconvenient. Judge him on how often he uses transit after his transit plan has been implemented and the new LRT lines are built, etc.
You know, its really nice to solve problems by saying we need more transit. But what you are really doing is passing the issue off your desk and on to some bureaucrat's. This would then go to a transit planning committee and the numbers would be crunched. Then buses would be assigned, schedules changed and then....oops! There aren't enough people after 6PM to warrant the scheduling, therefore the service slows down. Not economical. It becomes the commuters' problem again. Commuters vote with their car keys, and voila - the problem is back in the forefront.
Then reduce the number of buses after 6... or switch to community shuttle buses after 6...


Look, as far as the SWRR goes, yes I can see the upside of having it, but must it really be built regardless of the cost? No matter how many homes dozed, no matter how much money it costs? To me it just seems like if we really put our minds to it, we can find less expensive/intrusive ways of solving the gridlock problem down there.

[Koolfire]

What about creating a bridge between 24th st and Crowchild? I'm not thinking freeway but a 60km/h 4 lane artery. Upgrade 37st and 68st to arteries aswell and it would provide an alternate route to cross Glenmore Trail. It a large distance to cross, 700 meter but it can be done as the Brooklyn Bridge is about that length.

Nenshi taken a lot of flack on his sight for not wanting to push through the SWRR. But the truth is that there is no way that there will be a shovel in the ground to build this thing until 2015. Province is coming back with a plan next year. Then Community consultations. Then there's probably going to property acquisation which will take time. And then funding will need to be put together. This issue really isn't for this election.

The way I see it is that Ric can promise the SWRR but there's a snowballs chance in hell that he can deliver in the next 3 years. Or I can go with Naheed and get some improvement today.

Anyone got the report that Neheed got the 90% of traffic on SWRR goes downtown. I would love to read it but I can't find it anywhere. For a professer you would think we could do some citations.

[jsbertram]

Dusting off some ideas I had last year after the SWRR was voted down:

Blue line is the main 37th St Tunnels
Yellow line is 37th St extending to Anderson Rd.
Light Blue line is the extension of Southland Dr.
Green and Red lines are the connecting tunnels from Glenmore Tr and Sarcee Tr to the main 37th St Tunnels

Using modern TBM tunnelling technology, no homes or business should have to be expropriated for construction, and the surface roads (Glenmore, Crowchild, Sarcee) don't need to be shut down for tunneling.

http://img692.imageshack.us/img692/8631/swringroadrev7.jpg

And a variation connecting directly to Crowchild using the 66 Ave Enmax power ROW:

http://img26.imageshack.us/img26/208/swringroadrev5.jpg

[freeweed]

SB Stoney to EB Crowchild is finally open. It was pretty hilarious this morning - I decided to spoil myself and drive to the LRT station. As I came down Stoney, I noticed the many flashing signs indicating that EB Crowchild needs to stay right, and take the new off-ramp. Plus the actual green signage indicating it. However, I was one of maybe 3 cars that figured this out. Another 30 or 40 in the pack with me continued on straight, including the bus from Royal Oak that I would normally be taking. So even Calgary Transit drivers were confused.

After merging onto Crowchild west of the intersection (holy crap, there's a lot of traffic coming from Tuscany/Rocky Ridge/Cochrane!) I got a good look at all the cars that "missed" the turn, and were now sitting in the old left turn lanes. It was backed up 2 lanes wide dozens of cars deep. I wonder how long they're going to leave that turn open. What a gong show! :haha:

[Seadood]

http://www.nenshi.ca/new/2010/141

Look, as far as the SWRR goes, yes I can see the upside of having it, but must it really be built regardless of the cost? No matter how many homes dozed, no matter how much money it costs? To me it just seems like if we really put our minds to it, we can find less expensive/intrusive ways of solving the gridlock problem down there.

If you want an omelette, ya gotta break some eggs. Do we REALLY need a SE or a Centre St LRT? Regardless of the cost? It seems that projects are justifiable when they are Nenshi"s pets. What about the houses bulldozed for those projects? I think the problem here is a classic Suzuki problem - a PhD gives you license to be an authority on any subject.
I also find it interesting that Nenshi is all for a tunnel to the airport. Coincidentally, he lives in the NE. So such a large expenditure is OK, even though it would really be most beneficial to the businesses and employees at the airport.
"To me it just seems like if we really put our minds to it, we can find less expensive/intrusive ways of solving the gridlock problem down there".

[fusili]

If you want an omelette, ya gotta break some eggs. Do we REALLY need a SE or a Centre St LRT? Regardless of the cost? It seems that projects are justifiable when they are Nenshi"s pets. What about the houses bulldozed for those projects? I think the problem here is a classic Suzuki problem - a PhD gives you license to be an authority on any subject.
I also find it interesting that Nenshi is all for a tunnel to the airport. Coincidentally, he lives in the NE. So such a large expenditure is OK, even though it would really be most beneficial to the businesses and employees at the airport.
"To me it just seems like if we really put our minds to it, we can find less expensive/intrusive ways of solving the gridlock problem down there".

An ad hominem argument again. And I don't know what you mean about the Suzuki problem, I have always evaluated his ideas based upon the strength of the argument, and in most cases, he makes a very compelling argument. I respect him because of his well though out ideas, I don't believe his ideas because I respect him. Same with Nenshi. I respect him because of his ideas and policy, I don't just like him and then support his ideas because of it.

[Mazrim]

Look, as far as the SWRR goes, yes I can see the upside of having it, but must it really be built regardless of the cost? No matter how many homes dozed, no matter how much money it costs? To me it just seems like if we really put our minds to it, we can find less expensive/intrusive ways of solving the gridlock problem down there.

Well, people are putting their minds to it. Hence the current study underway to determine the most reasonable alternatives. In my opinion, I doubt tunneling will be something they consider. Costs always seem to be much higher than other alternatives, and some of the ideas posted here are for some pretty crazy lengths.

The government is committed to building the ring road, just as they are in Edmonton. It was placed as a provincial priority, and you can be certain that the goverment will follow through with their promise to finish them. The government treats Stoney Trail not only a city issue, but regional and even provincial when you consider the two busiest highways in the province connect to it. Edmonton is fortunate that they haven't had any land issues with their ring road, and the final piece of Anthony Henday will be completed in the next few years.

Also something to remember, this isn't "costing" the government like you think. Hence the great part of P3s, it's like a car loan to the contractor you pay over time. Alberta Transportation pays the Stoney Trail Group something like $35 million a year for the NE Ring Road and maintenance of the NW and NE.

The house demolishing issue in the SW is still up in the air, and I believe the 700 house number is a load of bull.

[BP_Brandon]

Also, noticed this morning the Harvest Hills Interchange is now open.........

[Seadood]

An ad hominem argument again. And I don't know what you mean about the Suzuki problem, I have always evaluated his ideas based upon the strength of the argument, and in most cases, he makes a very compelling argument. I respect him because of his well though out ideas, I don't believe his ideas because I respect him. Same with Nenshi. I respect him because of his ideas and policy, I don't just like him and then support his ideas because of it.

Again, you call it an ad hominem argument, I call it vetting. Suzuki's POV would be more palatable if the guy actually demonstrated that he was concerned about the people he would be displacing with his policies, were he in power. And that's another thing - the guy refuses to ante up. He won't take his philosophies to the people, he just wants to yip like a little dog then run and hide in his foundation. Credit to Nenshi for putting his ideas to the voters. BUT, you've not answered my statement that Nenshi's platform includes a tunnel policy that is deemed more worthy than the SWRR.

[freeweed]

Also, noticed this morning the Harvest Hills Interchange is now open.........

Fully free-flow for Stoney? That would be sweet to see 2 major improvements on the road in a single day!

[Danma]

I take harvest hills onto stoney east every morning and indeed, it was open for business! So awesome. I hated those lights, that left turn, the 80km/hr zone. Finally!!!

[fusili]

Again, you call it an ad hominem argument, I call it vetting. Suzuki's POV would be more palatable if the guy actually demonstrated that he was concerned about the people he would be displacing with his policies, were he in power. And that's another thing - the guy refuses to ante up. He won't take his philosophies to the people, he just wants to yip like a little dog then run and hide in his foundation. Credit to Nenshi for putting his ideas to the voters. BUT, you've not answered my statement that Nenshi's platform includes a tunnel policy that is deemed more worthy than the SWRR.

Ok, I will bite. The tunnel is not more worthy than the SWRR, or even the SELRT for that matter. But the thing is, the tunnel is a time sensitive issue. If it isn't addressed now, costs will go up dramatically. Not the case with the SWRR or SELRT (which are both as important, if not more in my mind). While the SWRR problem (or I would like to say the SW traffic problem, because I don't want to preclude other alternatives) needs to be addressed, waiting a few years will not triple the costs. It will for the airport tunnel. I wish I could come up with a good analogy right now, but I can't.

And going back to the whole ad hominem argument vs. "vetting" thing- it is really a matter of separating the idea from the person. Personally, there are a lot of people who have ideas that I really like, but who, personally, I have a great distaste for. Don't let your distaste for someone personally taint your views of their ideas.

Think of it as the Pianist and Roman Polanski. The Pianist was a terrific movie, well directed and beautifully shot. It was touching and inspiring. Roman Polanski is a molester and should be put in prison for the rest of his life. I like the Pianist and I loathe Roman Polanski.

Another example would be Martin Luther King Jr. The guy plagiarized parts of his PhD. Does that make his fight for Civil Rights invalid?

Ad hominem arguments are terrible things, because they deflect the discussion away from logical argument and making sound defences of a position to comments on people's character. I know I am a sort of "ad hominem" stickler on this forum, but I only do it because I think it really takes away from the discussion.

[Seadood]

Ok, I will bite. The tunnel is not more worthy than the SWRR, or even the SELRT for that matter. But the thing is, the tunnel is a time sensitive issue. If it isn't addressed now, costs will go up dramatically. Not the case with the SWRR or SELRT (which are both as important, if not more in my mind). While the SWRR problem (or I would like to say the SW traffic problem, because I don't want to preclude other alternatives) needs to be addressed, waiting a few years will not triple the costs. It will for the airport tunnel. I wish I could come up with a good analogy right now, but I can't.

And going back to the whole ad hominem argument vs. "vetting" thing- it is really a matter of separating the idea from the person. Personally, there are a lot of people who have ideas that I really like, but who, personally, I have a great distaste for. Don't let your distaste for someone personally taint your views of their ideas.

Think of it as the Pianist and Roman Polanski. The Pianist was a terrific movie, well directed and beautifully shot. It was touching and inspiring. Roman Polanski is a molester and should be put in prison for the rest of his life. I like the Pianist and I loathe Roman Polanski.

Another example would be Martin Luther King Jr. The guy plagiarized parts of his PhD. Does that make his fight for Civil Rights invalid?

Ad hominem arguments are terrible things, because they deflect the discussion away from logical argument and making sound defences of a position to comments on people's character. I know I am a sort of "ad hominem" stickler on this forum, but I only do it because I think it really takes away from the discussion.

Every year the SWRR is NOT built, hidden costs in delays in travel time increase, as well as construction costs. Do we have to hit "failure" on Macleod and environs before action is taken? How many years have SW residents endured this? What is their cost in lost time and opportunity?
As for separating the idea from the person - when that person is open and receptive to counter views - terrific! Not so with you-know-who. He would shut down key industries, and not in a wind-down sort of way. He would send many millions of people into a poverty situation. But I'm sure he is a good father and doesn't kick his dog.
As for MLK Jr., dig a little deeper. Couldn't keep his marital vows. It speaks of character as well.
Your concern about ad hominem is a convenient dodge. It absolves people of responsiblity for their deeds and words.

[Mazrim]

While the SWRR problem (or I would like to say the SW traffic problem, because I don't want to preclude other alternatives) needs to be addressed, waiting a few years will not triple the costs. It will for the airport tunnel. I wish I could come up with a good analogy right now, but I can't.

You don't need an analogy for this...you're dead on. Considering there won't be any construction ready design for some years to come for the SWRR, the airport tunnel should be the priority before it is too late and the costs will skyrocket.

[fusili]

Your concern about ad hominem is a convenient dodge. It absolves people of responsiblity for their deeds and words.

Yes, it absolves people of responsibility. It doesn't change the argument.

[Seadood]

Yes, it absolves people of responsibility. It doesn't change the argument.

Sorry, I come from the old school where a person's character is measured by their words and deeds. Guess I'm a monster because I've judged Hitler, Stalin and Mao on their words and deeds.
I'll keep trying, though, since an ad hominem attack on them would be unfair.

[fusili]

Sorry, I come from the old school where a person's character is measured by their words and deeds. Guess I'm a monster because I've judged Hitler, Stalin and Mao on their words and deeds.
I'll keep trying, though, since an ad hominem attack on them would be unfair.

I think you keep missing the point. I am telling you to separate the argument from the person. You don't like Hitler, Stalin or Mao? Neither does anyone else. But if Mao said "Murdering innocent children is wrong" that does not make Mao a good person nor does it make murdering innocent children right. You should judge a person on words and deeds for sure, but you should never judge words on a persons character.

Separate the person from the argument. I also think Suzuki is a bit of a jack-ass, that is for sure. But he has good ideas about promoting sustainable development, protecting the environment and all that.

And by the way, an ad hominem attack is not unfair to the person, it is unfair to the argument.

[freeweed]

You should judge a person on words and deeds for sure, but you should never judge words on a persons character.

...

And by the way, an ad hominem attack is not unfair to the person, it is unfair to the argument.

The salient points here bear repeating, so that maybe we can put this tiresome discussion to bed.

[MMMBeer]

SB Stoney to EB Crowchild is finally open. It was pretty hilarious this morning - I decided to spoil myself and drive to the LRT station. As I came down Stoney, I noticed the many flashing signs indicating that EB Crowchild needs to stay right, and take the new off-ramp. Plus the actual green signage indicating it. However, I was one of maybe 3 cars that figured this out. Another 30 or 40 in the pack with me continued on straight, including the bus from Royal Oak that I would normally be taking. So even Calgary Transit drivers were confused.

After merging onto Crowchild west of the intersection (holy crap, there's a lot of traffic coming from Tuscany/Rocky Ridge/Cochrane!) I got a good look at all the cars that "missed" the turn, and were now sitting in the old left turn lanes. It was backed up 2 lanes wide dozens of cars deep. I wonder how long they're going to leave that turn open. What a gong show! :haha:


I take it this is "stage 4" of construction? Guess Stage 5 (free flow under Crowchild, one traffic light for EB Crowchild to NB Stoney only) ain't happening anytime soon. Was scheduled for late October originally according to a post a few pages back.

[freeweed]

I take it this is "stage 4" of construction? Guess Stage 5 (free flow under Crowchild, one traffic light for EB Crowchild to NB Stoney only) ain't happening anytime soon. Was scheduled for late October originally according to a post a few pages back.

Well, they're still working like crazy down there. I can almost see Stoney running under Crowchild this year. I sure hope so as that intersection is becoming just unbearable at many times throughout the day.

Imagine... free-flow from 17th Ave SE to Nose Hill Drive. And then it's just one more set of lights to go! :notacrook:

[Seadood]

I take it this is "stage 4" of construction? Guess Stage 5 (free flow under Crowchild, one traffic light for EB Crowchild to NB Stoney only) ain't happening anytime soon. Was scheduled for late October originally according to a post a few pages back.

Not sure, but I thought that completion of the interchange was scheduled for fall of 2011. Stage 5 was to be by this fall, yes, but that seems like an inordinate amount of time to complete the NB lane and final EB-NB loop, if Stage 5 occurs this fall as planned. Reading the PR it states that completion is fall 2011, but don't know if that means contruction of LRT, in addition to all the interchange construction.

[mersar]

Not sure, but I thought that completion of the interchange was scheduled for fall of 2011. Stage 5 was to be by this fall, yes, but that seems like an inordinate amount of time to complete the NB lane and final EB-NB loop, if Stage 5 occurs this fall as planned. Reading the PR it states that completion is fall 2011, but don't know if that means contruction of LRT, in addition to all the interchange construction.

The rest of the LRT construction beyond the 2 bridges won't actually begin until after the interchange construction wraps up, as LRT construction is currently scheduled for 2012-2014 with a fall 2014 opening for the station.

[Oliver Klozov]

... that seems like an inordinate amount of time to complete the NB lane and final EB-NB loop, if Stage 5 occurs this fall as planned. ...

Besides the items you mentioned for next construction season, there is a lot of landscaping work yet to be done and maybe another lift of asphalt too. It will be fall next year before we can legally ( ;) ) go 100 kph.